The Nation v. The Divine

[Ameteurial Outdated Philosophia]

Based on a conversation I had with a family member whom I respect not too long ago...

If there were some sort of literal holy war going on in which a literal divine power, whether the Roman gods, the Abrahamic God, Ahura Mazda, whatever, ended up in opposition to your country, and the two ended up in open conflict with one another, whose side would you take?

And since many ascribe infinite or near infinite power to the divine as well as control over the afterlife, would your answer change depending upon punishment in the afterlife, or chances of success?

I am becoming increasingly convinced that it is possible to be an American and a Christian, but not a Christian and an American.

Does said divine power HAVE to be the one my country believes in? Or can it be a heathen deity?

[The Land Fomerly Known as Ligerplace]

That's a laugh. Unless you're serious ofcourse, in which case it's dissapointing, backwards and hypocritical (Thou shalt not kill, anyone?). And what exactly makes you think your bearded space fairy, were it to exist, was objective in the first place? And before you say Bible let me just point out that supposing it actually was dictated by god (spoiler alert: it isn't), then it's certainly not reliable source in determining gods objectivity.

I'm absolutely serious, and there's nothing backwards or hypocritical about it. What I'm not is an Abrahamitic monotheist, though... so whatever the Bible does or does not say is completely irrelevant to my stance.

As I said above already: If and when a deity shows up in person (bloody unlikely at best, but that's the for-the-sake-of-argument conceit this entire thread is based on), I advocate for blindly following their commands, no questions asked, and will do my utmost best to do exactly that, regardless of what my subjective ethical opinion on tose commands might have been before the command was given. And that holds true no matter if that deity is YHVH, Zeus, Odin, or an entity humankind previously never had the vaguest theory of existing. SImply by being a god, the moral imperative to every human is to obey this entity's commands without question, because full and unquestioning obedience equals objective goodness.

Direct and absolute theocracy, the moment it becomes possible, is infinitely and eternally morally superior to every other form of government that has ever existed, or could ever exist, in human society.

Dude, just go into magic. People have been and are even now dealing with Gods and all that shit face to face anyway.

I didn't even wanna push it there, but if your gonna leave the Abrahamic idea and go into Greek and Norse myths, then I feel a least qualified to say this.


They. Were. Flawed. Assholes. Flawed emotional assholes that happened to be born from greater beings anyway and happen to have superpowers as far as the myths are concerned. Not even going into what is and isn't a metaphor, or which gods were just metaphors. Hell, you go back far enough, there's myths where people are descended from entities that birthed the gods in the first place, but are just trapped in fucked up mortal coils. You have this idea that divinity equals perfection by default, hell no. They were some of the most fucked up entities in their own stories. Even Zeus could put Trump to shame with his wandering penis going into every hole, consensual or not. And even the end time Christ figure, like Jesus' second coming, or Shiva at the end, or Vritra even maybe, they are almost always the most violent merciless fucked up sexually active bastards ever, and its BECAUSE of that they are divine. Hell, I'm named after one, and he's a fucking God of war flat out, and he plays the same role as Christ in the apocolypse, by being a merciless killer.

Even in Revalations, the Anti-Christ brings peace to the world. Its the true Christ that kills you.

[Jetan]

That's a laugh. Unless you're serious ofcourse, in which case it's dissapointing, backwards and hypocritical (Thou shalt not kill, anyone?). And what exactly makes you think your bearded space fairy, were it to exist, was objective in the first place? And before you say Bible let me just point out that supposing it actually was dictated by god (spoiler alert: it isn't), then it's certainly not reliable source in determining gods objectivity.

I'm absolutely serious, and there's nothing backwards or hypocritical about it. What I'm not is an Abrahamitic monotheist, though... so whatever the Bible does or does not say is completely irrelevant to my stance.

As I said above already: If and when a deity shows up in person (bloody unlikely at best, but that's the for-the-sake-of-argument conceit this entire thread is based on), I advocate for blindly following their commands, no questions asked, and will do my utmost best to do exactly that, regardless of what my subjective ethical opinion on tose commands might have been before the command was given. And that holds true no matter if that deity is YHVH, Zeus, Odin, or an entity humankind previously never had the vaguest theory of existing. SImply by being a god, the moral imperative to every human is to obey this entity's commands without question, because full and unquestioning obedience equals objective goodness.

Direct and absolute theocracy, the moment it becomes possible, is infinitely and eternally morally superior to every other form of government that has ever existed, or could ever exist, in human society.

Wow. You're even more wrong than I though. You cannot even claim the god is good by it's nature because you don't follow the abrahamic god. Humanity has had a shitton of explicitly (as in, even their followers agree on it) evil gods. Which, by nature are not good. Also, source your bullshit about theocracy being a good thing. Dystopian daydreams alone don't cut it.

[Omnonia]

Dude, just go into magic. People have been and are even now dealing with Gods and all that shit face to face anyway.

I didn't even wanna push it there, but if your gonna leave the Abrahamic idea and go into Greek and Norse myths, then I feel a least qualified to say this.


They. Were. Flawed. Assholes. Flawed emotional assholes that happened to be born from greater beings anyway and happen to have superpowers as far as the myths are concerned. Not even going into what is and isn't a metaphor, or which gods were just metaphors. Hell, you go back far enough, there's myths where people are descended from entities that birthed the gods in the first place, but are just trapped in fucked up mortal coils. You have this idea that divinity equals perfection by default, hell no. They were some of the most fucked up entities in their own stories. Even Zeus could put Trump to shame with his wandering penis going into every hole, consensual or not. And even the end time Christ figure, like Jesus' second coming, or Shiva at the end, or Vritra even maybe, they are almost always the most violent merciless fucked up sexually active bastards ever, and its BECAUSE of that they are divine. Hell, I'm named after one, and he's a fucking God of war flat out, and he plays the same role as Christ in the apocolypse, by being a merciless killer.

Even in Revalations, the Anti-Christ brings peace to the world. Its the true Christ that kills you.

The criterion by which I'd differentiate a superpowered spirit/alien from a god is omniscience and objectivity.

If the entity that appears fulfills these two standards, then no matter what kind of flawed asshole they are - I will obey them without question, and condemn anyone who doesn't as an evil infidel to be dealt with as my divine sovereign commands.

If the entity doesn't fulfill those, then they aren't a god... just a sufficiently advanced alien. The battle against them is likely to be hopeless, so I might turn to defeatist collaboration after all; but, unlike with the actual god, said collaboration would then not be due to my realization that they are of infinitely superior morality, and thus realize my moral duty to obey without question - it would, instead, be simply out of plain, simple fear.

Wow. You're even more wrong than I though. You cannot even claim the god is good by it's nature because you don't follow the abrahamic god. Humanity has had a shitton of explicitly (as in, even their followers agree on it) evil gods. Which, by nature are not good.

See above. If the entity fulfills the criterion for being a god, it is of superior morality, and it isn't in our place to disagree and talk back, just to obey.

Also, source your bullshit about theocracy being a good thing. Dystopian daydreams alone don't cut it.

Recognizing superior morality, and the humility of realistically knowing one's place. Theocracy avoids any and all risk of not doing what is objectively good; no other form of government can come even remotely close to that high standard.

And note that I'm talking about direct theocracy, not representative theocracy. Gargantuan difference.

[The Land Fomerly Known as Ligerplace]

Dude, just go into magic. People have been and are even now dealing with Gods and all that shit face to face anyway.

I didn't even wanna push it there, but if your gonna leave the Abrahamic idea and go into Greek and Norse myths, then I feel a least qualified to say this.


They. Were. Flawed. Assholes. Flawed emotional assholes that happened to be born from greater beings anyway and happen to have superpowers as far as the myths are concerned. Not even going into what is and isn't a metaphor, or which gods were just metaphors. Hell, you go back far enough, there's myths where people are descended from entities that birthed the gods in the first place, but are just trapped in fucked up mortal coils. You have this idea that divinity equals perfection by default, hell no. They were some of the most fucked up entities in their own stories. Even Zeus could put Trump to shame with his wandering penis going into every hole, consensual or not. And even the end time Christ figure, like Jesus' second coming, or Shiva at the end, or Vritra even maybe, they are almost always the most violent merciless fucked up sexually active bastards ever, and its BECAUSE of that they are divine. Hell, I'm named after one, and he's a fucking God of war flat out, and he plays the same role as Christ in the apocolypse, by being a merciless killer.

Even in Revalations, the Anti-Christ brings peace to the world. Its the true Christ that kills you.

The criterion by which I'd differentiate a superpowered spirit/alien from a god is omniscience and objectivity.

If the entity that appears fulfills these two standards, then no matter what kind of flawed asshole they are - I will obey them without question, and condemn anyone who doesn't as an evil infidel to be dealt with as my divine sovereign commands.

If the entity doesn't fulfill those, then they aren't a god... just a sufficiently advanced alien. The battle against them is likely to be hopeless, so I might turn to defeatist collaboration after all; but, unlike with the actual god, said collaboration would then not be due to my realization that they are of infinitely superior morality, and thus realize my moral duty to obey without question - it would, instead, be simply out of plain, simple fear.

Ok, just define what you mean, in complete elaboration, what you mean by objectivity.

[Omnonia]

Ok, just define what you mean, in complete elaboration, what you mean by objectivity.

Awareness of the factual truth about every conceivable topic, without any trace of bias - cognitive, sensory, emotional, or any other kind.

[Jetan]

Dude, just go into magic. People have been and are even now dealing with Gods and all that shit face to face anyway.

I didn't even wanna push it there, but if your gonna leave the Abrahamic idea and go into Greek and Norse myths, then I feel a least qualified to say this.


They. Were. Flawed. Assholes. Flawed emotional assholes that happened to be born from greater beings anyway and happen to have superpowers as far as the myths are concerned. Not even going into what is and isn't a metaphor, or which gods were just metaphors. Hell, you go back far enough, there's myths where people are descended from entities that birthed the gods in the first place, but are just trapped in fucked up mortal coils. You have this idea that divinity equals perfection by default, hell no. They were some of the most fucked up entities in their own stories. Even Zeus could put Trump to shame with his wandering penis going into every hole, consensual or not. And even the end time Christ figure, like Jesus' second coming, or Shiva at the end, or Vritra even maybe, they are almost always the most violent merciless fucked up sexually active bastards ever, and its BECAUSE of that they are divine. Hell, I'm named after one, and he's a fucking God of war flat out, and he plays the same role as Christ in the apocolypse, by being a merciless killer.

Even in Revalations, the Anti-Christ brings peace to the world. Its the true Christ that kills you.

The criterion by which I'd differentiate a superpowered spirit/alien from a god is omniscience and objectivity.

If the entity that appears fulfills these two standards, then no matter what kind of flawed asshole they are - I will obey them without question, and condemn anyone who doesn't as an evil infidel to be dealt with as my divine sovereign commands.

If the entity doesn't fulfill those, then they aren't a god... just a sufficiently advanced alien. The battle against them is likely to be hopeless, so I might turn to defeatist collaboration after all; but, unlike with the actual god, said collaboration would then not be due to my realization that they are of infinitely superior morality, and thus realize my moral duty to obey without question - it would, instead, be simply out of plain, simple fear.

Wow. You're even more wrong than I though. You cannot even claim the god is good by it's nature because you don't follow the abrahamic god. Humanity has had a shitton of explicitly (as in, even their followers agree on it) evil gods. Which, by nature are not good.

See above. If the entity fulfills the criterion for being a god, it is of superior morality, and it isn't in our place to disagree and talk back, just to obey.

Also, source your bullshit about theocracy being a good thing. Dystopian daydreams alone don't cut it.

Recognizing superior morality, and the humility of realistically knowing one's place. Theocracy avoids any and all risk of not doing what is objectively good; no other form of government can come even remotely close to that high standard.

And note that I'm talking about direct theocracy, not representative theocracy. Gargantuan difference.

Funny thing is, that's your subjective viewpoint. There is no reason to assume gods, were they to exist, were morally superior to humans. More over, what's to say what you think qualifies a being as a god actually does so? Being superior in some way does not equal godhood. Our own powers and abilities could certainly be described as godlike compared to many animals, insects, etc. and you don't see anyone claiming humans are gods because we might look like ones from the perspective of an ant. As for the "knowing one's place" nonsense, that's only espoused by two kinds of people; those who fancy themselves at the top of the pyramid, and those who've given up and resigned to their fate.

[Omnonia]

Funny thing is, that's your subjective viewpoint. There is no reason to assume gods, were they to exist, were morally superior to humans. More over, what's to say what you think qualifies a being as a god actually does so? Being superior in some way does not equal godhood. Our own powers and abilities could certainly be described as godlike compared to many animals, insects, etc. and you don't see anyone claiming humans are gods because we might look like ones from the perspective of an ant.

Don't strawman me. I haven't talked about "some kind of superiority", I have given a very concise and specific criterion. As humans, we are de facto on the exact same level as ants in regards to this criterion. If you consider yourself superior to an ant in this area, that's just your ego speaking - you're vastly overestimating your mental capabilities.

Gods are on an existentially different level. And yes, that level is one which, by its very existence, will obligate any creature capable of moral thought to unquestioningly obey a god's every command. Refusal to obey a god's command is objectively evil - I cannot see any logically consistent argument to the contrary. To be good, you must obey completely - blind obedience is your only chance at being an objectively good person.

As for the "knowing one's place" nonsense, that's only espoused by two kinds of people; those who fancy themselves at the top of the pyramid, and those who've given up and resigned to their fate.

I take the second half of your statement as a compliment. IMO, those who don't "give up and resign to their fate" usually are the exact jerkasses who fancy themselves at the top of the pyramid.

[Jetan]

Funny thing is, that's your subjective viewpoint. There is no reason to assume gods, were they to exist, were morally superior to humans. More over, what's to say what you think qualifies a being as a god actually does so? Being superior in some way does not equal godhood. Our own powers and abilities could certainly be described as godlike compared to many animals, insects, etc. and you don't see anyone claiming humans are gods because we might look like ones from the perspective of an ant.

Don't strawman me. I haven't talked about "some kind of superiority", I have given a very concise and specific criterion. As humans, we are de facto on the exact same level as ants in regards to this criterion. If you consider yourself superior to an ant in this area, that's just your ego speaking - you're vastly overestimating your mental capabilities.

Gods are on an existentially different level. And yes, that level is one which, by its very existence, will obligate any creature capable of moral thought to unquestioningly obey a god's every command. Refusal to obey a god's command is objectively evil - I cannot see any logically consistent argument to the contrary. To be good, you must obey completely - blind obedience is your only chance at being an objectively good person.

Show it then. Where have you given "a very concise and specific criterion", and what is it? As for the "objectively evil" part, I'm beginning to think you don't know what objective means. Your subjective view is that disobeying god is evil, but that's all it it - your subjective view.

As for the "knowing one's place" nonsense, that's only espoused by two kinds of people; those who fancy themselves at the top of the pyramid, and those who've given up and resigned to their fate.

I take the second half of your statement as a compliment. IMO, those who don't "give up and resign to their fate" usually are the exact jerkasses who fancy themselves at the top of the pyramid.

You're of course free to take it as compliment if you like, though I'm certain you're aware it was not meant as such.

[Omnonia]

Show it then. Where have you given "a very concise and specific criterion", and what is it? As for the "objectively evil" part, I'm beginning to think you don't know what objective means. Your subjective view is that disobeying god is evil, but that's all it it - your subjective view.

No, it's not. It's recognizing and accepting the objective truth, which you willfully deny out of the hubris of positioning yourself above god.

The criterion I gave was objectivity and omniscience. And disobeying such an entity's orders is simply not morally justifiable. Deciding to go against a god's command is rejecting objective goodness to commit objective less-than-goodness; such a choice is objectively evil. Every command issued by god is good and just, due to the source it comes from - yes, including commands to rape, pillage, and slaughter. God's army are inevitably the good guys, no matter what they do, as long as the act on god's orders. Even if they commit genocide on god's orders, then that would be the objectively good kind of genocide, and only evil and/or delusional people would protest against it, out of their own misguided subjective values.

You're of course free to take it as compliment if you like, though I'm certain you're aware it was not meant as such.

Yes, I am aware of that, however I fundamentally reject the value you (implicitly, and correcty inferred by me) attached to that description.

[Victores]

Why should god get to tell me what to do. I didn't vote for him. That peasent in Monty Python was right, Supreme Power derives from a mandadte from the masses.

[United Muscovite Nations]

Why should god get to tell me what to do. I didn't vote for him. That peasent in Monty Python was right, Supreme Power derives from a mandadte from the masses.

Why? The masses clearly don't have supreme power.

[Victores]

Why should god get to tell me what to do. I didn't vote for him. That peasent in Monty Python was right, Supreme Power derives from a mandadte from the masses.

Why? The masses clearly don't have supreme power.

Yeah they do, just kill everyone who refuses to listen.

[United Muscovite Nations]

Why? The masses clearly don't have supreme power.

Yeah they do, just kill everyone who refuses to listen.

Can they control forces of nature?

No?

Then no supreme power. If there is anything you can't do, you don't have supreme power.

[Omnonia]

Why should god get to tell me what to do. I didn't vote for him. That peasent in Monty Python was right, Supreme Power derives from a mandadte from the masses.

Why? The masses clearly don't have supreme power.

Much more importantly, they don't have objectivity. From a moral point of view, one voice speaking objective truth, leading the masses with absolute authority, is infinitely better than a democratic process could ever hope to be.

The only reason why democracy has been a better system than absolute autocracies in human history is that we as a species never once had any candidate for leadership who would have been remotely capable of seeing the objective truth, and giving orders that were based in it. (Simply becase all of those candidates were humans, not gods.) If that were to ever change, only the depraved will keep clinging to democracy; those with better moral fiber will go for theocracy without a second thought, because it's the right thing to do.

[United Muscovite Nations]

Why? The masses clearly don't have supreme power.

Much more importantly, they don't have objectivity. From a moral point of view, one voice speaking objective truth, leading the masses with absolute authority, is infinitely better than a democratic process could ever hope to be.

The only reason why democracy has been a better system than absolute autocracies in human history is that we as a species never once had any candidate for leadership who would have been remotely capable of seeing the objective truth, and giving orders that were based in it. (Simply becase all of those candidates were humans, not gods.) If that were to ever change, only the depraved will keep clinging to democracy; those with better moral fiber will go for theocracy without a second thought, because it's the right thing to do.

Precisely. If your disagreement is with a being that possesses infinite capacity for thought, infinite knowledge, and infinite power, then that's just silly.

[Victores]

Why? The masses clearly don't have supreme power.

Much more importantly, they don't have objectivity. From a moral point of view, one voice speaking objective truth, leading the masses with absolute authority, is infinitely better than a democratic process could ever hope to be.

The only reason why democracy has been a better system than absolute autocracies in human history is that we as a species never once had any candidate for leadership who would have been remotely capable of seeing the objective truth, and giving orders that were based in it. (Simply becase all of those candidates were humans, not gods.) If that were to ever change, only the depraved will keep clinging to democracy; those with better moral fiber will go for theocracy without a second thought, because it's the right thing to do.

Why would the gods help humanity. If they were omnipotent, they would let humans die out and enjoy earth themselves. There is no reason to believe that the divine has humanity's well-being in mind.

[Jetan]

Yeah they do, just kill everyone who refuses to listen.

Can they control forces of nature?

No?

Then no supreme power. If there is anything you can't do, you don't have supreme power.

Can god create a boulder he can't lift?

[United Muscovite Nations]

Can they control forces of nature?

No?

Then no supreme power. If there is anything you can't do, you don't have supreme power.

Can god create a boulder he can't lift?

Yes.

But then he could just make himself be able to lift it.

[United Muscovite Nations]

Much more importantly, they don't have objectivity. From a moral point of view, one voice speaking objective truth, leading the masses with absolute authority, is infinitely better than a democratic process could ever hope to be.

The only reason why democracy has been a better system than absolute autocracies in human history is that we as a species never once had any candidate for leadership who would have been remotely capable of seeing the objective truth, and giving orders that were based in it. (Simply becase all of those candidates were humans, not gods.) If that were to ever change, only the depraved will keep clinging to democracy; those with better moral fiber will go for theocracy without a second thought, because it's the right thing to do.

Why would the gods help humanity. If they were omnipotent, they would let humans die out and enjoy earth themselves. There is no reason to believe that the divine has humanity's well-being in mind.

Why would God want to kill something that He created?

[Omnonia]

Why would the gods help humanity. If they were omnipotent, they would let humans die out and enjoy earth themselves. There is no reason to believe that the divine has humanity's well-being in mind.

Whatever it is that they have in mind, that is the thing that is objectively good. If a god decrees that the best possible outcome is complete annhilation of humanity, then I'll do my best to help with the eradication of our species in whatever form god decides I can be of use in that effort. Because it still stands: If god commands it, it's objectively the right thing to do.

[Jetan]

Can god create a boulder he can't lift?

Yes.

But then he could just make himself be able to lift it.

That would mean he could not create a boulder he's not able to lift.

Show it then. Where have you given "a very concise and specific criterion", and what is it? As for the "objectively evil" part, I'm beginning to think you don't know what objective means. Your subjective view is that disobeying god is evil, but that's all it it - your subjective view.

No, it's not. It's recognizing and accepting the objective truth, which you willfully deny out of the hubris of positioning yourself above god.

The criterion I gave was objectivity and omniscience. And disobeying such an entity's orders is simply not morally justifiable. Deciding to go against a god's command is rejecting objective goodness to commit objective less-than-goodness; such a choice is objectively evil. Every command issued by god is good and just, due to the source it comes from - yes, including commands to rape, pillage, and slaughter. God's army are inevitably the good guys, no matter what they do, as long as the act on god's orders. Even if they commit genocide on god's orders, then that would be the objectively good kind of genocide, and only evil and/or delusional people would protest against it, out of their own misguided subjective values.

You're of course free to take it as compliment if you like, though I'm certain you're aware it was not meant as such.

Yes, I am aware of that, however I fundamentally reject the value you (implicitly, and correcty inferred by me) attached to that description.

There is no objectively good genocide, etc.

Why would the gods help humanity. If they were omnipotent, they would let humans die out and enjoy earth themselves. There is no reason to believe that the divine has humanity's well-being in mind.

Whatever it is that they have in mind, that is the thing that is objectively good. If a god decrees that the best possible outcome is complete annhilation of humanity, then I'll do my best to help with the eradication of our species in whatever form god decides I can be of use in that effort. Because it still stands: If god commands it, it's objectively the right thing to do.

Careful now, don't want to cut yourself on that edge.

[United Muscovite Nations]

Yes.

But then he could just make himself be able to lift it.

That would mean he could not create a boulder he's not able to lift.

No, it just means that he is able to make himself able to lift things that he was not able to lift.

Also, the boulder paradox is basically just sophistry. Boiled down into just logical terms, it's completely nonsensical: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Omnipoten ... le_meaning

[Omnonia]

There is no objectively good genocide, etc.

You aren't in the position to decide that.

Careful now, don't want to cut yourself on that edge.

It's humility, not edginess.

[Victores]

Why would the gods help humanity. If they were omnipotent, they would let humans die out and enjoy earth themselves. There is no reason to believe that the divine has humanity's well-being in mind.

Why would God want to kill something that He created?

How do we know he created "us".

Why would the gods help humanity. If they were omnipotent, they would let humans die out and enjoy earth themselves. There is no reason to believe that the divine has humanity's well-being in mind.

Whatever it is that they have in mind, that is the thing that is objectively good. If a god decrees that the best possible outcome is complete annhilation of humanity, then I'll do my best to help with the eradication of our species in whatever form god decides I can be of use in that effort. Because it still stands: If god commands it, it's objectively the right thing to do.

How do we know he isn't some kind of space alien that understands human culture, disguising himself as "god" and then seeing to everyone's self genocide.